Reimagining Singapore's work culture: the four-day workweek proposition

The five-day workweek has long been the cornerstone of global work culture, yet emerging workplace paradigms increasingly challenge this established norm, offering promising alternatives for enhancing both organisational effectiveness and employee well-being. While the concept of a four-day workweek is not new—originally advocated by civil rights activist Walter Reuther in the 1950s—it has gained renewed prominence as a flexible model for modern workplaces.¹ Contemporary interpretations now extend beyond traditional compressed schedules, advocating for maintained salaries alongside reduced hours. This approach is exemplified by the “100:80:100” model promoted by 4 Day Week Global, which entails maintaining 100% pay for 80% time while targeting 100% productivity.¹

The COVID-19 pandemic catalysed an unprecedented re-evaluation of workplace flexibility, along with its cascading effects on well-being, productivity, and innovation.² Research underscores the health and well-being benefits of shorter working hours, with evidence showing that working beyond 39 h per week negatively impacts mental health.³ Between 2000 and 2016, mortality rates from heart disease linked to prolonged work hours (≥55 h) rose by 42%, while stroke-related deaths increased by 19% compared to standard 35–40-h weeks.⁴ The Western Pacific region is particularly affected,⁴ with work-related stress and cardiovascular disease posing significant public health challenges.⁵ Contrary to concerns about diminished productivity, growing evidence suggests that shorter workweeks can sustain or even enhance output while addressing multiple organisational challenges, including reducing burnout, lowering operational costs, improving retention, and boosting job satisfaction.⁶

Global implementation: lessons and insights

The four-day workweek has become a focal point for workplace innovation, with diverse implementation models providing valuable insights. Scandinavian countries, particularly Sweden, have reported significant public sector improvements, including reduced exhaustion, lower stress levels, fewer work-family conflicts, and better sleep quality.⁷ Iceland's comprehensive 2015–2019 trial, involving 2500 government employees, demonstrated enhanced work-life balance without compromising productivity.⁸ Similarly, France's transition to a 35-h workweek yielded positive health outcomes while maintaining productivity standards.⁹

In the United Kingdom, an extensive trial involving 60 companies and 2900 employees produced compelling results, with 89% of organisations continuing the four-day schedule post-trial.¹⁰ South Cambridgeshire Council's implementation across 450 employees—including desk-based and manual roles—achieved notable outcomes: a 39% reduction in turnover and estimated savings of £371,500.¹⁰ However, implementation challenges remain, as illustrated by Asda, a major supermarket chain, which encountered difficulties among employees with caregiving responsibilities or long commutes under compressed 44-h workweeks.¹⁰

In the Western Pacific region, the experiences of Japan and Korea provide particularly relevant insights.¹¹ Japan's reduction from 48 to 40 h improved life satisfaction for employees and their families, while Korea reported similar gains after reducing weekly hours from 44 to 40. Microsoft Japan's adoption of a four-day workweek even resulted in a 40% increase in productivity and a 94% employee satisfaction rate.¹² These examples highlight the importance of tailored implementation strategies. Successful programmes, such as those in South Cambridgeshire, often adopt the “100:80:100” model to maintain salaries and productivity while reducing hours.¹⁰ While the four-day workweek shows significant potential, its success depends on thoughtful, industry-specific design.

The Singapore context: challenges and opportunities

Singapore provides a compelling case study in the discourse on the four-day workweek. In the Asia–Pacific region, countries like Singapore, China, and Malaysia consistently rank among the most overworked, with average weekly working hours ranging from 42 to 45 h in 2022 [data not shown].¹³ A recent local study highlighted Singapore as one of the world's most overworked nations, with an average workweek of 45 h and 23% of the population even working over 48 h per week.¹⁴ According to the Singapore Ministry of Manpower, the average weekly paid hours worked per employee was 43.3 h as of June 2024, with ‘usual hours worked’ recorded at 44.5 h in 2023.¹⁵ Consequently, long working hours remain a significant concern for the workforce. The “Hustle Culture” study, surveying 3000 Southeast Asian employees,¹⁶ further highlights troubling trends in Singaporean workplace well-being:

• •52% reported poor quality of life, higher than Indonesia (37%) and the Philippines (36%).
• •Only 57% rated their mental health as “good” or better, compared to 68% in Indonesia and 78% in the Philippines.
• •A mere 42% reported high work engagement, trailing Indonesia (52%) and the Philippines (56%).
• •Job dissatisfaction was at 26%, higher than Indonesia's 15% and the Philippines' 17%.
• •Sleep quality issues affected 30% of workers, nearly double the regional rates.

This intense work culture has led to widespread dissatisfaction, with 73% of Singaporean employees reporting unhappiness and 62% experiencing burnout.¹⁷ Despite overwhelming employee interest—93% would support a four-day workweek trial—employer resistance remains significant.¹⁸ Among 330 employers surveyed by Singapore National Employers Federation, only 5% expressed openness to the idea, with 79% opposed and 16% hesitant but willing to consider it.¹⁹ This resistance is largely driven by operational concerns, such as perceived business incompatibility, anticipated productivity losses, and projected increases in staffing costs. Local employers are notably less receptive than their regional counterparts, with only 18% considering a four-day workweek within two years, compared to the regional average of 37%.¹⁸

The ongoing discussion aligns with Singapore's evolving workplace norms. The forthcoming Tripartite Guidelines on Flexible Work Arrangement (FWA) Requests, effective December 2024, signals a growing recognition of the need for workplace flexibility.²⁰ Although these guidelines do not specifically address four-day workweeks, they represent a significant step toward more adaptable work arrangements.

Exploratory research suggests that a four-day workweek could help address many of Singapore's workforce challenges, including reducing stress and burnout while improving work-life balance and sleep.²¹ However, it is crucial to consider the potential gendered implications of such a shift. Research highlights that domestic labour and caregiving responsibilities are often unequally distributed, disproportionately burdening women.²² A four-day workweek could provide additional time for invisible work, such as household chores and childcare with the benefit being more pronounced for women,²³ while also enabling employees to engage in health-promoting activities like physical exercise—a challenge for many Singaporeans due to time constraints and fatigue, as reported in a nationwide survey.²⁴ By allowing more time for exercise, self-care, and meal preparation, a four-day workweek could help mitigate cardiovascular disease risk and support overall well-being.⁴ From a business perspective, shorter working hours could enhance employee focus and engagement, addressing Singapore's low engagement rates.²¹ Additionally, adopting a four-day workweek could increase the nation's attractiveness to global talent, boost employee retention, and strengthen employer branding—ultimately enhancing Singapore's competitiveness in the region.²¹

Nonetheless, a one-size-fits-all approach may not be ideal. Recent studies suggest that offering employees greater control over their schedules and implementing policies tailored to individual needs can have a more substantial impact on health and well-being.²⁵ Combining flexible work arrangements with reduced working hours may provide a more nuanced solution, particularly for parents and caregivers who require structured time management. Considering the diverse needs of workers, especially those with significant caregiving responsibilities, organizations can create more inclusive and supportive work environments.

The path forward: implementation considerations

Adopting a four-day workweek in Singapore would require a structured approach to address operational challenges and balance employee enthusiasm with employer reservations. A phased implementation, beginning with pilot programs in select industries, could provide valuable insights. Knowledge-based sectors, where productivity is more easily quantifiable, may serve as ideal candidates for initial trials. These pilots should run for at least six months to allow for comprehensive data collection on productivity and employee well-being. For industries requiring continuous service, strategies such as optimized scheduling, process improvements, and leveraging technology could help maintain operational efficiency.

Government support would be instrumental in ensuring a seamless transition. Incentives for trial participation, alignment with FWA guidelines, and the establishment of clear frameworks to guide businesses could facilitate adoption. Uniform standards across sectors, while allowing for industry-specific adaptations, would ensure equitable and balanced implementation. Critical factors for success include maintaining equitable compensation, ensuring fairness across roles, and conducting regular assessments of productivity and well-being. Such measures would enable data-driven adjustments, ensuring that Singapore retains its economic competitiveness while fostering a satisfied and healthy workforce.

Although the four-day workweek has yet to be widely adopted in Singapore, evidence suggests its potential as a viable workplace innovation. Thoughtful implementation could position Singapore as a leader in assessing this model's alignment with national objectives while providing valuable insights into workforce efficiency and well-being. This shift represents more than just a reduction in working hours—it signals a potential transformation in Singapore's approach to work-life integration.

However, reducing working hours alone cannot fully address workplace well-being. A holistic strategy must also tackle broader issues, such as mitigating workplace psychosocial hazards, enhancing job security, and improving organizational practices that impact employee health and satisfaction.²⁶ As global competition for talent intensifies and workforce expectations evolve, Singapore's ability to respond comprehensively to these challenges will be critical in shaping its future economic resilience and social cohesion.

Contributors

CSA—Conceptualisation; Writing—original draft; Writing—review & editing.

Declaration of interests

The opinions shared in this comment reflect the author's personal views and do not represent those of their employer or organization. There are no other competing interests to disclose.